AUD Study Group Q1 2016 - Page 29

Viewing 15 replies - 421 through 435 (of 1,065 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #747186
    win2bet
    Participant

    @ peter far wars said it right. when realize there was omitted procedure, need to 1st decide if impairs ability to support previous opinion.

    as far as after, i don't think it matters if the omitted procedure or alternative procedure is used; so long as can somehow support the previous opinion

    REG 68,87
    BEC 85
    FAR 75
    AUD 64,64, 86!

    #747187
    FAR_WARS
    Participant

    A client uses a suspense account for unresolved questions whose final accounting has not been deter­mined. If a balance remains in the suspense account at year-end, the auditor would be most concerned about:

    A. suspense debits that management believes will benefit future operations.
    B. suspense debits that the auditor verifies will have realizable value to the client.
    C. suspense credits that management believes should be classified as “Current liability.”
    D. suspense credits that the auditor determines to be customer deposits.

    Answer is A. I have never heard of a “Suspense Account” before. It has a debit balance? Is it an asset? Contra-revenue?

    From Ninja:

    Material misstatements due to fraudulent financial reporting often result from an overstatement or understatement of revenues. Therefore, the auditor should ordinarily presume that there is a risk of material misstatement due to fraud relating to revenue recognition.

    Material misstatements due to fraudulent reporting often result from an overstatement of revenues, either through premature revenue recognition or recording fictitious revenue, or from an understatement of revenues by improperly shifting revenues to a later period.

    Of the answer choices listed, an auditor would be most concerned that the suspense debits will be used in future operations creating an overstatement of revenues for that year.

    FAR- 80
    BEC- 75
    AUD- 78
    REG- ?

    #747188
    payaza2000
    Participant

    @FAR_WARS

    I previously hadn't heard of a “Suspense Account.” before either. until I started working at the Nonprofit I do now. The Suspense Account is used for items in which the Controller, or Staff Accountant are uncertain of the Accounting Treatment of. I do not believe (and someone correct me if I am wrong) that it has a natural Debit or Credit Account like a Asset, Liability, or Contra Asset Account.

    In the context of this question if the Suspense Account had a Debit Balance at year end it could point to trying to misstate Revenues, because an item came through you stuck it in Suspense, and at year end you credit it to take it out.

    FAR 5/6/2015- 84
    REG 8/3/2015 - 87
    AUD 10/25/2015- 69 1/20/2016 -75
    BEC 2/26/2016- 80

    Thank you God

    #747189
    Pete
    Participant

    yeah i got later thanx @win2betmore

    #747190
    Pete
    Participant

    the debit side will overstate the AR not the revenue or they are trying to understate the revenue ?

    #747191
    payaza2000
    Participant

    A lawyer's response to an auditor's inquiry concerning litigation, claims, and assessments may be limited to matters that are considered individually or collectively material to the client's financial statements. Which parties should reach an understanding on the limits of materiality for this purpose?

    A.
    The board and the client's management

    B.
    The client's audit committee and the lawyer

    C.
    The client's management and the lawyer

    Correct D.
    The lawyer and the auditor

    I was under the impression that the Auditor did not discuss ‘Accounting Issues' with the Lawyer. So they would not ask the lawyer about for example Going Concern issues. Wouldn't MAteriality be a Accounting Issue?

    FAR 5/6/2015- 84
    REG 8/3/2015 - 87
    AUD 10/25/2015- 69 1/20/2016 -75
    BEC 2/26/2016- 80

    Thank you God

    #747192
    FAR_WARS
    Participant

    AU-C 501
    from an example inquiry letter (prepared by MGMT, sent by auditor to lawyer):

    “These contingencies are regarded by management as material
    *Management may indicate a materiality limit if an understanding has been reached between the lawyer and the auditor.

    Looks like we are communicating the materiality limit to the lawyer- and by responding, they are acknowledging that they understand the materiality limit.

    I remember Becker saying that “we are not lawyers” but i believe they were discussing a different topic (negative assurance on compliance)

    FAR- 80
    BEC- 75
    AUD- 78
    REG- ?

    #747193
    FAR_WARS
    Participant

    Anyone know who signs the Lawyer Inquiry Letter? Is it Management or is it the Auditor?

    FAR- 80
    BEC- 75
    AUD- 78
    REG- ?

    #747194
    csvirk
    Participant

    its the management

    FAR: 71, 77!
    AUD: 69, 80
    BEC: 72
    REG: 84

    #747195
    payaza2000
    Participant

    Yeah I am also confused on this matter, I know that it is the Client that sends the Lawyer the letter of Inquiry because of Lawyer- Client confidentiality. But I am not sure who signs it

    FAR 5/6/2015- 84
    REG 8/3/2015 - 87
    AUD 10/25/2015- 69 1/20/2016 -75
    BEC 2/26/2016- 80

    Thank you God

    #747196
    Pete
    Participant

    do i understand it right ?

    #747197
    FAR_WARS
    Participant

    @Payaza
    Mgmt prepares it and signs it. Auditor sends it to lawyer.

    @Peter
    They are debiting a “Suspense Account” now to somehow overstate revenue in a subsequent year. As auditors we want to prevent this. I am still unclear exactly how this works.

    FAR- 80
    BEC- 75
    AUD- 78
    REG- ?

    #747198
    Pete
    Participant

    FAR-WARS please see my post about ethics questions tell me if i am right or wrong ?

    #747199
    Pete
    Participant

    here :

    I saw that post has good questions about ethics chapter

    https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-forum/topic/ethics-questions-please-help

    my answers will be

    1- b

    2-b

    3-b

    4-c ( i am not sure )

    5-d

    #747200
    FAR_WARS
    Participant

    I can't find the answers to those questions anywhere, and i don't want to study from them unless I am certain of the answers. Also they are at least 3 years old so I am not sure what may have changed since then.

    FAR- 80
    BEC- 75
    AUD- 78
    REG- ?

Viewing 15 replies - 421 through 435 (of 1,065 total)
  • The topic ‘AUD Study Group Q1 2016 - Page 29’ is closed to new replies.